About your Search

20121202
20121210
STATION
MSNBCW 13
CNNW 6
SFGTV2 3
KPIX (CBS) 2
KQED (PBS) 2
MSNBC 2
CNBC 1
KGO (ABC) 1
KQEH (PBS) 1
KRCB (PBS) 1
WTTG 1
LANGUAGE
English 37
Search Results 0 to 36 of about 37 (some duplicates have been removed)
today, that the supreme court is taking the prop 8 case, the perry case, as well as the doma case. and, you know, look, when this case was filed almost four years ago, the prop 8 case, we made the case in court that in this country we don't deny our citizens a fundamental right, and the supreme court has called marriage a fundamental right no less than 14 times in the history of this country, and i'm optimistic that once the court does hear this case and the doma case, they're going to come down on the side of freedom, liberty, and equality just as they have so many times in our nation's past. >> and equal protection of the laws. elizabeth, thank you for coming on. equal protection of the laws. lib cert a pretty profound notion in this country. >> it is 37. >> pursuit of happiness is our declaration. why not? >> here is the thing, if you are gay and alive in our time in america, we're living in a kind of a policy and civil rights renaissance. we have seen extraordinary leadership from other parts of government already. don't we judge, chris, presidents by whether they stand up to the m
challenge the defense of marriage act. doma is known as the 1996 law enacted by president clinton that ordered the federal government to recognize only marriages between a man and woman. in the intervene years since clinton passed the law, american attitudes have shifted. 2012 set to go down as one of the most successful years ever for the gay right movement. marriage equality advocates won at the ballot box when maine, maryland and washington voted to join six other states and district of columbia in permitting same-sex marriage and the year that president obama became the first sitting president to publicly endorse gay marriage, a powerful sign that once politically sensitive issue has moved firmly into the mainstream. frank, you have, i thought, an incredibly moving and compelling op-ed in "the new york times" talking about doma and the thing that struck me is how far the country has come in a relatively short period of time. just because i was interested in comparing it to interracial marriage, in 1958, gallup showed that 4% of the country approved of interracial marriage. by
it's going to play out the doma case prop 8 case how two different cases how do you think doma case. >> doma case involves whether someone who had lived with domestic partner for 45 years should have to pay estate taxes where if they lived as husband and wife she would not have to pay estate taxes and prop 8 involves whether or not gay marriage is simply legal. i think what we are seeing here they only need four justices to decide whether to take the issue. i think there is a little bit of politics there because if obama appoints more justices, they are not going to have to get the issue before the court. i think expect that the court going to say that gay marriage is legal just as they said you couldn't ban racially mixed racial marriages and things of that sort. you know, husband and wife, man and woman does not appear in the constitution. it's more a policy or religious decision than a legal decision. legally i don't think they can ban it. >> laura: i clerked at the court quite a few years ago now back in 1993. but predicting what the court is going to do is always quite difficul
the doma case. gay marriage advocates who want the defense of marriage act struck down say doma creates a gay-only exception to federal recognition of state licensed marriages. and we believe that the federal government should stop discriminating against same sex couples legally married by their states. but defender of traditional marriage between one man and one woman say, quote: since president bill clinton signed doma into law, 30 states have followed suit by incorporating the definition of marriage into their constitutions. voters in these states will not accept an activist court redefining our most fundamental social institution. arguments on both cases are likely to be in march and rules likely in june. shep? >> shepard: we got another announcement from the supreme court today. it's going to take up another case that really could effect what we all pay for prescription drugs. >> right. this is about the battle between more expensive brand name drugs and cheaper generic drugs. some of the brand name companies pay the generic drug makers to keep cheaper drugs off store counters whi
of the sisters of loreto my wish is that we achieve marriage equality in every state and we resend doma on the federal level to achieve full quality for lesbian and gay relationships across the land. >> i wish that the bees were not dying from. >> that is a good one. >> my hope is for improved economic conditions for my country's most vulnerable people that we create healthy environments and green spaces and by country men and women become fully conscious of their ability to change things for the better. >> baptist from haiti. my wish is for more justice, economic as well as social justice, starting with the recognition that poverty is not a sin. >> i wish for wish for a world without boarders and walls, age 53, argentina. [ applause ] >> i wish for a world where the children are more just and more kind and fair in the world than the one we know. president, barack obama. >> and now, this is a good one, that donna and i can very strongly identify with. i wish that male fashion designers would be forced to wear the things that they create for women like stelleto heals and it gets better.
. the justices will also review a provision of the federal "defense of marriage act" or doma that deprives legally married gay couples of federal benefits that are available to heterosexual couples. same-sex marriage is legal or will be soon in nine states and the district of columbia. but 31 states have amended their constitutions to bar gay unions. here with us to explain today's development, and where it could lead, is marcia coyle of "the national law journal." welcome back, marcia. >> thanks, marg wet. >> warner: so is it fair to say first of all that the court's decision to hear these first two cases in itself a momentous decision? >> absolutely. a number of gay rights organizations, particularly as if relates to the federal defense of marriage act have been working towards that point. and yes, whatever the court says, if it reaches the merits of these cases will be extremely important. >> warner: let's take them one by one, prop 8 in california first. remind us briefly of how what started out as a state issue ended am in the supreme court. >> the california supreme court a number of
. >> the supreme court will actually decide on two issues, doma, the federal law that prohibits recognition of same- sex marriages, and colorado's prop 8. the berkeley couple at the heart of the case is ecstatic. >> he texted me, omg, five exclamation points, granted. so then she called me. and we just started crying. >> they've got to solve this at a national level, because there's just too much administrative confusion right now. who gets health benefits, who can visit who in the hospital, all of these, you know, which marriage counts? >> a lot of focus is on anthony kennedy, the supreme court justice born and raised in sacramento. cbs 5 reporter linda yee on how this coming court case is tailor made for him. >> reporter: the final say in the cultural war on same-sex marriage is coming. and the justices decision to hear the case is historic. >> this is equivalent to the supreme court taking on one of the most divisive issues. first, the justices could say that denying marriage to any couple is unconstitutional, just like the former band on interracial marriage. that decision could overturn any s
. probably the most serious standing questions are on the doma case and windsor case. the cases being defended by a group of republican members and it is not clear that they have actual standing to bring the case. so if the court says you don't have standing, then the e lower court would prevail and windsor would prevail. >> how would the court's ruling affect marriage equality? >> it couldn't be more important. that case came for african-americans in 1954, i believe. this could be that moment. we're all hoping that it is. this country is an imperfect union by mere fact that we have not recognized the right of people in love to be married. there are 120,000 couples in this country that are directly -- have their interests directly at stake. but it's not just them. the question is will this country embrace this fundamental human right? and i don't believe kennedy wants to be on the wrong side of history on that. >> this is the latest challenge to the constitutionty. is doma doomed? >> i think it is. there are four district courts saying it violated the rights of gay and lesbian couples
to consider choosing and two prop 8 ones. they have one doma and one prop 8. >> what's fascinating, this is a court that has avoided this issue. it's been pathological. everyone in lawrence v. texas, the opinion was distorted in my ways because of a clear effort not to say anything that would have baring on the same-sex marriage issue. suddenly, they take two issues with the broadest possible front. the question is, what are they going to do and whether they are going to reach an impasse. if there's an impasse, sometimes they go for narrow decisions. there are outs in these cases. both cases have standing issues. questions of whether these are the party that is have a right to bring this type of challenge. the standing issues are particularly prominent in the doma case. the proposition 8 case probably offers the broadest scope for a major ruling. what people, many people hope, is that that would be the case where the court says this violates equal protection. you can't deny these people the same rights of marriage. if it were to do that, then it would effectively set aside 31 state
the federal defense of marriage act, or d doma, and another involving california's proposition 8, banning same-sex marriages in that state. for analysis into these historic cases, what's going to be a historic hearing, i want to bring in kinji yoshityoshito, professor of constitutional law at new york city. great to see you. >> good to see you. >> put prop 8 aside for a second. do you believe that the supreme court will strike down doma. this is what what you've said. walk me through your thinking on that one. >> y bet. so doma is a really narrow challenge insofar as what the statute does is it says for federal purposes marriages are defined between one man and one woman. so i think it might be best to clarify this by example. so you take edie windsor, a plaintiff coming out of new york who's going to be the plaintiff in this case. she was with another woman for 40 years. they got married in 2007. when her partner passed away, her wife passed away, for state purposes, in the eyes of new york state, she was next of kin. so her remains were released to edie. but for federal purposes, they were c
. the other case called windsor versus doma originated in new york and challenges the constitutionality of the defense of marriage act. we're going to talk about this a little bit more this morning, and we'll have our legal contributor paul callan discuss it with us right after this break. i always wait until the last minute. can i still ship a gift in time for christmas? yeah, sure you can. great. where's your gift? uh... whew. [ male announcer ] break from the holiday stress. ship fedex express by december 22nd for christmas delivery. up high! ok. don't you have any usefull apps on that thing? who do you think i am, quicken loans? ♪ at quicken loans, our amazingly useful mortgage calculator app allows you to quickly calculate your mortgage payment based on today's incredibly low interest rates... right from your iphone or android smartphone. one more way quicken loans is engineered to amaze. ♪ home of the legendary grand prix circuit. the perfect place to bring the all-new cadillac ats to test the 2.0-liter turbo engine. [ engine revs ] ♪ [ derek ] 272 horsepower. the lightest i
for the time being? >> reporter: you know, that's the interesting question here. we don't know. the doma case doesn't invite the court to answer that question. it simple says if in those states that decide to grant same-sex marriage, which is up to the states, can the federal government still refuse to recognize those marriages? even if the supreme court strikes down the doma law, it won't say anything about whether a state has to allow same-sex marriage. on the prop 8 case it is possible to rule on that case very narrowly or broadly. let me explain. when the court of appeals said that prop 8 was unconstitutional, it said you can't do what california did. you can't give the right, which the california supreme court did, and then take it away, which prop 8 did. california's the only state that did that. if the supreme court barely upholds the court of appeals ruling, that would be good for california only. if the supreme court dives fully into in and gets into the basic constitutional question about whether states can block same-sex marriage, then, yes, they would get to it. they won't -- the
when they passed doma into law in 1996. i need to get your immediate reaction to the supreme court news this afternoon. >> well, i think it's very good for the advocates of marriage equality that the court took both of these issues up. the first issue is this question of the defense of marriage act. it was passed really in the middle of the night in 1996 and signed very reluctant lie by president clinton and e sin essentially says one state does not have to recognize the marriage equality rights another state may give. if you are married legally in the state of massachusetts and you happen to reside -- this is as a gay couple -- and you happen to reside in the state of california, the state of california does not need to recognize your massachusetts marriage, and as a result there are over 1,000 benefits that can be denied to a legally married gay couple if they happen to be living in a state that doesn't recognize gay marriage. my guess is the supreme court will declare that unconstitutional because there is a long tradition under the privileges and immunities clause of the constitutio
important cases, prop 8 out of california and doma out of new york. a federal court recently overturned prop 8 after the measure passed by voters. the court will decide if doma violates the fifth amendment of equal protection under the law that applies to same-section couples legally married in other states. >>> today is a very happy day for same-section couples in washington state. it is the first day they can marry under the new law, legalizing gay marriage. couples began lining up for licenses early thursday morning. some courthouses opened up at midnight for the ceremonies to take place. several local judges also donated their time to marry the couples. ceremonies are expected all day today. >>> last week, washington state became the latest state to legalize marijuana and now businesses there are jumping on the opportunity to create more revenue for themselves and the state. fox has the details. >> reporter: the sign is an invitation to come inside frankie's sports bar and light up a joint. in between pool shots, that's just what herald caldwell does. >> this is my favorite place to go a
no news on prop 8 in california the same-sex marriage ban or doma until friday december 7th, when they have another chance to decide to take it up again. so far still a waiting game. no decision to take up prop 8, the same-sex marriage ban in california. >>> former president clinton comes to northern california tomorrow due to deliver a standing room only speech tomorrow night at sacramento's memorial auditorium, the hottest ticket in town, vip tickets $200 each sold out a while ago. he is a political rock star after ending his second terp he's turned himself into one of the most sought after political figures on the planet earning continuing of millions a year in speaking fees. >>> jane king is live from the new york stock exchange. good morning jane. >>> good morning. chrysler seeing a pick-up in demand partly thanks to superstorm sandy buyers returning to show rooms in november after the waters receded and replacement demand increased after hundreds of thousands of vehicles damaged or destroyed by sandy. as for trading, manufacturing in china helping give u.s. stocks a lift tod
. the end of the doma act. how do you see this? >> one of the first things that usually comes to my mind when i think about prop 8 was that you had the people of california, they looked at having this particular law upheld as simply because they're the ones who wanted it to happen. and the courts there decided no forget about it. it's simply not going to happen. not only that but if you remember, the donors who were supporting this law, they had a lot of people come after them during that whole scenario. also remember, a lot of businesses who whether it be say wedding photographers, wedding deejays, bank gbank get hauls wo may not be catering to same-sex marriages, they have been attacked very often by lawsuits because they may not necessarily be catering to same-sex marriages. saw this over in new mexico with elaine photography when a photographer said i don't care to photograph same-sex marriage ended up being sued. this lawsuit is still going on right now. >> jimmy williams, welcome back. just explain to me. i'm sure there's a logic to it. i always look at these things as social issue
. the supreme court will now be looking at both prop 8 and doma. this could potentially be huge for gay rights in america. >> especially with david boyes and ted olson coming together, the guys who were against each other in bush v gore, on the same side fighting for gay rights, for gay marriage. i think it's a really interesting case because they designed this case not to kind of be technical but just to go at the straight heart of the issue which is whether not letting gay people marry is discrimination. so it's a pretty direct hit on whether this is allowed or not, and i think they have a really good chance of winning this and kind of basically deciding this once and for all. which is the way this is going to move forward. this isn't the way civil rights get decided, they get decided by our courts because the constitution is designed to protect people's rights. >> i completely agree. i think the state by state element of this just can't wash for much longer. it has to be done at a national level. where will that leave the members of the republican party that feel very strongly about this an
as well, as you know, that will be overcome. >> the other case involves doma, defense of marriage act. what's at the heart of that question? >> not the fundamental right of same-sex marriage but whether the federal government can define marriage in a certain way, as between one man and one woman. historically that's been the job of the states to decide what marriage is, to define it. that really is the federal government stepping somewhere where it hasn't before. what they have done with that statute is say people can't have thousands of federal benefits. the case before the supreme court involves a woman who had to pay $363,000 in estate taxes she wouldn't have had to pay just because the person she was married to was the same gender as herself. it's fairness but limbed to that one state. >> patricia, always good to see you. thanks for weighing in. >> thank you. >> the deadline for the fiscal cliff is just over three weeks away. lawmakers are still mired in part in gridlock, each side saying the other is to blame. what do their constituents think? cnbc says 21% would blame the presid
early next year. in fact, ten cases related to the federal defense of marriage act, or doma and proposition 8 are pending against supreme court justices right now. at least one of them is going to make it to their docket. we could find out which one today about early next week or so. i'm joined by our legal analyst jeffrey tubin. remind us what are the court's oping whz it comes to marriage equality, and the differences here between doma and prop 8. >> well, defense of marriage act -- defense of marriage act was signed by president clinton in 1996, and it's a law that says the federal government, all as pecks of the federal government, including the internal revenue service will not recognize same-sex marriages even many states where same-sex marriage is legal and two appeals courts have held that that is unconstitutional, that it is unlawful discrimination. the obama administration agrees that this law is unconstitutional. it's now being defended by a lawyer hired by the house of representatives, and the case about is the defense of marriage act constitutional, that is one.
's start with doma. if that is struck down by the high court, thewill that be thed of conservatives' attempts of outlawing gay marriage? >> it is the mother of all federal laws to try to outlaw. it will be over it it's overturned. if social conservatives try to get smart about this stuff, looking for opportunities to play defense instead of offense, doma, which is a terrible law in my estimation, was an attempt to completely play offense. you can't do this anywhere in any state. we're going to pre-empt you before you try. i think social cons are in a much better position when they say, look, let's make it so the government can't compel us to do things privately we don't want to do. i think you'll see much more emphasis placed on that. the question will be more than what will the supreme court try to do because they don't want to be out in front of public opinion too much. it's going to be fascinating. >> and they've rarely been accused of doing that either. david, let's move on to prop 8 in california. if that's struck down, does that mean same-sex marriage is for all intensive purp
and california's proposition 8. doma denies federal benefits to legally married same-sex couples while prop 8 makes same-sex marriage illegal in california. same-sex marriages are legal in nine other states and the district of columbia. a decision on these cases is expected sometime in june. >>> korean pop star psy is making headlines for a whole other reason than you might think this morning. his music video may be the most watched video in youtube history, but now an old video from 2004 has surfaced of psy calling for the death of american soldiers in iraq. that performance resurfaced in october. in his apology, psy said his performance had been emotionally charged, and "while i'm grateful for the freedom to express oneself, there are limits. i am deeply sorry for any pain i have caused by those words." he is scheduled to perform at a charity event in washington. president barack obama is also planning on attending that event. >>> speaking of president obama, he's issuing a stern warning to syria. don't even think about using chemical weapons against civilians. i'll talk about the implicati
justices will hear cases that challenge the federal defense of merge act or doma as it's known or california's proposition 8 which defines marriage as strictly between a man and a woman. >>> authorities have ordered folks in parts of louisiana to get out of town as they work to secure more than 6 million pounds of gun powder. gun powder. improperly stored m-6 powder was found at camp minden on property leased by expo system. workers are busy moving the powder into authorized facilities on the site. they have safely stored more than 1 million pounds. that is enough to fill 27 18-wheelers. >> wow. nine bodies have been recovered from three crushed, burned out cars in a highway tunnel 50 miles west of tokyo. officials still don't know what caused a 200 foot section of eight inch thick concrete to cave in over the weekend. take a look at these incredible pictures. and they're not saying whether there might be more victims in the rubble. >>> malala yousafzai, that pakistani girl who was shot in the head by the taliban is saying thank you to all of her new friends all over the world.
Search Results 0 to 36 of about 37 (some duplicates have been removed)